Lord Mhoram

I don't watch Walking Dead, so I don't know if her role there is large enough to be concerned about the split focus, and likely inevitable conflict between series scheduling. (Maybe not initially, but somewhere down the road.)

Was she one of the ones that Sam and Dean's dad beat to death with a barbed wire baseball bat?

Federalist 68. The Electoral College exists in large part as a check on demagogic populism.

Well there is some irony for ya.

Recently watched Star Trek Beyond, ID4: Resurgence, and Central intelligence.

Beyond was much better than Into Darkness (the worst of new Trek) - I watched it on DVD, as the second movie left such a bad taste in my mouth I couldn't bring myself to see it in theaters. Wish I had. Decent movie.

Resurgence... I loved the first one, and like this one even more.

Central Intelligence - had to scan over some stupid stuff, but a lot less than I thought I would. The comedy was decent, and I love the Rock doing comedy, and Kevin Hart was restrained enough that I enjoyed it.

Rpg.net is concerned that China was reported flying a nuclear bomber over the south china sea close to Taiwan.

CES 

I left RPG net after the election due the insanity there.

The biggest problem I had with Neelix was that he just wasn't interesting.  He was there pretty much there as an appendage to Kes--and Kes wasn't that interesting, either.

 

In all, though, I thought Voyager had a good group of characters. Tom Paris was great, and having him take newbie Harry Kim under his wing made for some cool stories. I liked Janeway quite well when the writers weren't using her as a straw feminist (not that she was ever as bad as Samantha Carter in the first few episodes of SG-1). Tuvok and even Chakotay were interesting in their own ways. And Robert Picardo played the Doctor brilliantly. The cast--both actors and characters--had real potential.

 

Too bad the writing was so inconsistent.

Yeah. My overall opinion of Voyager, that the best episode were on par with the best episodes of any other trek. The bad ones (Threshold, which gave me my Rock Band 3 band name - Warp 10 Catfish) were as bad or even worse that others.. and had a higher percentage of them. Average episodes were not quite up to the average of the others. So overall it came off bad, but had many moments of brilliance.

I think the bad writing for Janeway was really eximplified by Q "Sleep with me and I'll take your ship home" - so she either betrays what she promised the crew, to get them home any way she could, or betray herself and her standards. That was the moment I truly understood that the writers had no clue about how to write her.

I wonder if the singing crossover with the Flash is still going to be a thing.

And while they have not announced that this will be why - it has become known that Mxyzptlk will be on Supergirl. He seems a good way to make the musical episode happen.

No, I tend to worry about practical real world outcomes. I tend to support a particular ideology/philosophy because I think it creates the best outcomes in practice. But if someone can suggest an alternative approach and prove it works or has promise, I'll give it a shot. I see voting as a practical choice first, guided by moral considerations, not vice versa.

Thanks for clarifying, that makes things much more clear.

I vote with the well-being of the people of the country in mind, particularly the most vulnerable. Who will be the best president to help the most vulnerable, and if that option is not available, who will do the least harm? Whether the best candidate has a realistic chance of being elected is also a very practical consideration. I don't want to let down people I care about by wasting my vote. So, realistically, that's almost always going to come down to the two major party candidates. Sometimes, it's who's the best, and others, it's who does the least harm. I see voting as a practical decision. Occasionally we get lucky and our ideals are on the ballot. Most of the time we're not so lucky, but our principles and interests are still at stake, as are those of people who matter to us. Some of those people are differently situated, so we have to think beyond how an outcome will affect us personally. How will it affect my friends, my family, my neighbors, my coworkers and people in my city and state and country and world? I am not an island. I am defined, in part, by the people I am connected to. Everyone is. So why should voting be a selfish or self-centered decision? Sure, I think about how it affects me, but that's not my only consideration. YMMV.

I can see that point of view.

I've found (at least personally) that everyone that is worried about "the cause" or what is best for all ends up caring more about their cause that what it will do to actual people. Not saying that is you, by any means - just those I have met personally.  When I vote, I don't necessarily vote who would be best for me, but one who I think would do the best to help the country... if they can't actually win doesn't enter into my consideration. I choose the best I can among the choices available.

It doesn't, of course. But explaining to third party voters not to waste their vote isn't blaming them, it's trying to up their game

This is how I view my duty to vote: I'm not worried about "realpolitik" - I'm not worried about who can win, or who can't. Who has national support or who does not. My vote is my conscience, choosing the single candidate that I feel that most exemplifies my goals for the country, and that is a person I can, in good faith, trust. I don't vote to win, I vote for the single best candidate. It's not a wasted vote, it's how I can live with myself with a field of despicable choices. I've voted for third party presidential candidates twice in my life, and am proud of that fact.

It is, but it's also kind of condescending. Lots of congressmen visit their districts regularly, talk to constituents and respond to letters, calls and emails from them. Now, Senators may be a different animal, and more likely to spend more time in Dc and less time in their states.

Good advice is good advice even if some are already doing it.

I will vote for Rob Bishop until he stops running. Why? I posted a concern about something on his webpage form. He called me back personally a few days later. Not a secretary, not an automated call, but him personally. Utah is lower population, so that is more reasonable then say New York but that touch of humanity won my loyalty.

Well, none of us wants to get Banned or Moderated, so there's that.

 

But yeah, I find the folks here are pretty okay.

 

(I'm currently on a two-week hiatus from Facebook, myself. I've heard enough from others to know that I don't need to be there right now.)

Yeah. - Post election has been much worse than pre election.,

I've ended up blocking some posters, not because I don't like them anymore, but I am trying to block all politics on facebook. I have politically passionate friends. I had a nice private conversation with them about it.

Pariah - our Mutual Gothic friend was one.

Understood.

 

You are my favorite arch-nemesis, by the way. My BANF, if you will.

Lol.

That is the exact reason I figured it was safe to talk about politics here. The other major RPG message board I visit is seemingly militant left, and facebook is a disaster. Thanks for have a civil, if unresolved, discussion.

But it's not even different. It's not even a brick through the Washington establishment window. The establishment that's holding them down is corporate-funded rich guys in Washington. If anything they've voted for more establishment. With a side of fraud and racism because sure, why not.

I was talking from that point of view. He talked a different game. Both are frauds and liars (in my opinion).

I've expressed myself as best as I am able. If you don't understand, I won't be able to do any more.

We have been arch-nemesis for years, so I'll just leave it at that.

My first opinion of my own about the election. I was relieved when Trump was elected. I didn't vote for either of them (I had a candidate that I could, in good conscience vote for)- but between the two, the idea of Clinton being elected scared me more than Trump.

So the serial liar and fraudster billionaire is... better?

 

Look, explain it to me as though I were a small, working-class child:

 

A: I vote for Trump.

B: ???

C: My life improves!

 

Fill in that B: for me. I'm not being facetious or anything, I really do want to understand.

It's not necessarily better - but different. The last couple of decades Obama, W (to an extend) and Clinton has all been going a similar direction. He is different. We know (from that point of view) that what we had is slowly destroying my life, and Hillary is more of the same. Trump may not be any better, but at least he is different, and may make things better. Clinton would not for sure.

It's not so much that someone would want Trump, but the "brick thrown through the Washington establishment window"  that he represents.

These two article here and here really explain what I am talking about.

NPR has Trump's stated plan for his first 100 days up if you want to see what's coming

Thanks

Of the first six, I'm a little leery of #2 and #3, but the rest I can completely agree with.

The rest are hit or miss.

On the contrary, we completely understand why people feel disenfranchised and ignored. We too feel disenfranchised and ignored. What's harder to understand is why they think electing a corporate "billionaire" is going to help with that. There's only one party that would even consider helping out that class of voter, and it isn't Trump's.

Hillary is seen by many as having cheated Bernie out of the nomination with the superdelegate situation. More standard Washington insider stuff. With that view someone could see Trump as having a better chance of change than she does. The fact he never held elected office is a big bonus there too.

Personally I think Bernie would have beat Trump.. but *shrug*.

That was kind of the thrust of Hillary Clinton's concession speech. It was a lot less about conceding (beyond the obligatory "let's work together with the new president" message) and more about motivating the Democratic Party base to keep fighting the good fight. I can respect that.

What we need is for those that don't support Trump to understand why so many people felt so disenfranchised and ignored by the "media elite" and policy makers that they elected someone with so many personality flaws to the presidency. If that communication can happen we can get actual growth - not just name calling of supporters from one side or the other. Much of middle/lower class America has felt ignored, mocked and brushed off that they finally said 'Enough is enough"

Think about jokes made at the expense of "white trash" or rural Americans, (people who work hard all their lives only to see jobs going overseas and health care costs rising) - the jokes made at thier expense by comedian of the stripe of Bill Maher ... if those jokes were made about any other group (Minorities, Islam, women) the person would be off the air and careers destroyed. It makes sense that the butt of those jokes decided to make a statement about change, even supporting someone they may find personally distasteful.

Personally I don't like Trump, but I can completely understand why he was elected. I'm hoping the shock of Hilary's defeat will make the liberal elite actually try and figure out why and communicate with them - and build a better future that includes them; instead of mocking and ignoring them as has been done by Washington insiders for decades.

On the comment about all aliens having superpowers, wasn't that what the whole Legion of Super Heroes was based on? Most planets sending a representative, and what would be normal on their planet was considered a power somewhere else?

Not quite. Lightning Lad was a classic "hit with electricity got electrical powers" kind of origin, for example. But for the majority of the membership had "natural" powers. They were usually just among the best of their planet. The Legion wasn't based on the concept thought, it just sort of developed that way.

You mean like writing in the relationship after Magneto had been powermad for himself since appearing in X-Men #1? I think his history with Xavier was written in at a time not far off the backstory being added to Xavier and Magneto (and Magneto's WW II involvement was added about the same time a lot of other characters' was being removed - but he has the de-aging in Defenders and revival in X-Men 104 as a moving target for his physical age). And the prior relationship was only added in the 50's/60's Superboy stories, not the early Luthor appearances.

Yeah, and in both cases having the relationship made for better stories. Doesn't matter when it happened. If someone creates something that makes better stories for characters who are around a long time, it seems stupid to get rid of it.

John Byrne was the first to say this is how it worked in his excellent Man of Steel post-Crisis Superman reboot,

The only thing I didn't like was his Lex Luther, I still prefer the scientist first, businessman secondary or tertiary (who knew Clark as a youngster) than the straight businessman. Getting rid of the history was akin to getting rid of any of Charles and Magneto's history, and making magneto powermad for himself, rather than motivated by the mutant war. 

I'm 4 episodes into Cage, and so far it is my favorite of the NF shows. Daredevil was good in season 1, I bailed halfway through season 2. Jessica was amazing, but so dark. Cage is dramatic and important but not dark in the same way - and for me they really nailed Cage in character, looks and physical acting.  Going to have it done by end of week.

I don't really care about ethnicity.

There are some backgrounds that imply a certain ethnicity. It would be a little difficult to do batman that way - old money, even now, implies white. Iron Fist is an ousider in Kung Lung - so I wouldn't want an Asian, but any other would be fine for me. My only issue with Johnny Storm being black is that I think Sue and Johnny share the same ethnicity.  She looks fine for MJ to me. But I feel that way in the reverse, I have no issue with Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One.

CBS All Access is an online service. If you're outside of the US, Netflix will be streaming the episodes after they air.

Paid though, so I'll find it free at some point.

If you look at extant Trek rather than McQarrie's design, it looks like A Klingon D7 back (triangular and lowered nacelles)  and Fed Saucer. The music got decidedly drum based and Klingonish when that part of the ship came into view. I'm cool with that.

I just want to know what era/timeline it's going to be in. Visually it looks Pre-TNG. Maybe even pre-TOS.

I don't get that station, but I'm sure I;ll find them somewhere to watch.

 

I'll wait for reviews from someone I trust before seeing it, of course.

I'm sure I will see it opening weekend, I'll let you know.

As someone who really enjoyed Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice, this trailer and the JLA one look amazing.